Hi Stephen,

Could you please help us understand the rationale behind showing just the last non-owned port in case the port mask was not specified?
I really appreciate your help in this regard.

Regards,
Subendu.



On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 11:04 AM Subendu Santra <subendu@arista.com> wrote:
Hi Stephen,

We were going through the patch set: https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/20200715212228.28010-7-stephen@networkplumber.org/ and hoping to get clarification on the behaviour if post mask is not specified in the input to `dpdk-proc-info` tool.

Specifically, In PATCH v3 6/7, we see this:
+	/* If no port mask was specified, one will be provided */
+	if (enabled_port_mask == 0) {
+		RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV(i) {
+			enabled_port_mask |= 1u << i;

However, in PATCH v4 8/8, we see this:
+	/* If no port mask was specified, then show non-owned ports */
+	if (enabled_port_mask == 0) {
+		RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV(i)
+			enabled_port_mask = 1ul << i;
+	}

Was there any specific reason to show just the last non-owned port in case the port mask was not specified?
Should we show all non-owned ports in case the user doesn’t specify any port mask?

Regards,
Subendu.